On 02/24/2015 11:28 AM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Micah Fedke
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 02/20/2015 05:31 PM, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Micah Fedke
<[email protected]> wrote:
+def _gen_tolerance(name, rettype, args):
+ """Return the tolerance that should be allowed for a function for
the
+ test vector passed in. Return -1 for any vectors that would push
the
+ tolerance outside of acceptable bounds
+ """
+ if name in simple_fns:
+ if name == 'op-mult' or name == 'op-assign-mult':
Seems like this should be outside of the if. So like
if name == 'op-mult' or name == ...:
elif name in simple_fns:
elif name in compelx_fns:
It could work just as well that way, yes. My intent was to first split the
names into two mutually exclusive high-level groups (simple_fns and
complex_fns), and then treat individual members of those groups as necessary
(eg. the mult operations, which only appear within simple_fns). I'd like to
leave it this way for clarity, if you agree? I can add a comment line
somewhere about the mutual exclusivity of the two groups.
Yeah, but you treat op-mult totally differently than the other simple
functions. Making them not-simple. Perhaps they should just be in
complex fns?
Haha, yeah, wasn't thinking clearly. The mults are *both* simple and
complex. Simple when float*float or vec*vec, but complex when mats show
up and force matrix multiplication. I'll try a third group :)
+ x_type = glsl_type_of(args[0])
+ y_type = glsl_type_of(args[1])
+ if x_type.is_vector and y_type.is_matrix:
+ mult_func = _vec_times_mat_ref
+ elif x_type.is_matrix and y_type.is_vector:
+ mult_func = _mat_times_vec_ref
+ elif x_type.is_matrix and y_type.is_matrix:
+ mult_func = _mat_times_mat_ref
+ else:
+ return simple_fns[name]
+ ret = _analyze_ref_fn(mult_func, args)
+ return -1.0 if any(ret['badlands']) else map(float,
ret['component_tolerances'])
+ else:
+ return simple_fns[name]
+ elif name in complex_fns:
+ if name in componentwise_fns:
+ ret = {'errors':[], 'badlands':[],
'component_tolerances':[]}
Is there some sort of advantage to keeping these in a dict?
The dict is for clarity purposes only. I guess I could use a named tuple
instead? It seemed like more code . . .
The alternative I had in mind was just 3 separate variables...
Will do.
--
Micah Fedke
Collabora Ltd.
+44 1223 362967
https://www.collabora.com/
https://twitter.com/collaboraltd
_______________________________________________
Piglit mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
